CIR and Property Developers: Managing Capitalized Interest Risks
Introduction to CIR in the Property Development Context
The UK’s Corporate Interest Restriction (“CIR”) regime limits how much interest expense a group can deduct for corporation tax. Essentially, CIR limits deductions to an ‘interest allowance’ determined under either the fixed ratio (30% of aggregate UK tax-EBITDA) or the group ratio. In both cases a ‘debt cap’ also applies, based on the worldwide group’s qualifying net group-interest expense (QNGIE) rather than a simple measure of external borrowing costs.
There is £2 million per period de minimis amount. If the group’s aggregate net tax-interest expense does not exceed that amount (time-apportioned for short/long periods), no restriction arises. The regime still applies, and filing may still be needed to make certain elections or preserve attributes. However, larger property development companies, which often rely on significant debt financing, must navigate CIR carefully. With interest rates rising in recent years, interest expense has become a major cost for property businesses, making CIR rules especially impactful on the real estate development sector.
How CIR Works (in brief):
For each accounting period, a group calculates its UK tax-interest expense (interest payable net of taxable interest income). If this net interest exceeds the allowed cap (30% of aggregate UK tax-EBITDA or the higher amount permitted by a group ratio election based on the worldwide group’s leverage, but subject always to the external debt cap), the excess is disallowed for tax.
Disallowed interest isn’t lost forever – it can be carried forward and “reactivated” in future years if the group has spare capacity. Likewise, any unused interest allowance (capacity) can be carried forward for up to 5 years to increase future deductibility. In practice, this means developers should track disallowed interest carry-forwards and unused capacity as they plan projects. The goal is to ensure that over a project’s life, as much interest as possible is ultimately deducted – but, as we will see, timing mismatches can jeopardize this.
Capitalized Interest in Developments and Timing Mismatches
A common feature of property development is capitalized interest. During construction, a developer often adds the accrued interest on development loans to the cost of the building or land (rather than expensing it in the profit and loss). For accounting purposes this is allowed under UK GAAP/IFRS, and for tax, if the development is intended for sale (trading stock), the interest effectively becomes part of the cost of goods sold and is only deducted when the property is sold. In other words, interest incurred during the build phase “follows the accounts” – it crystallizes as a deductible expense only when the stock is sold and its cost is released through cost of sales. This practice can produce a significant timing gap between when interest costs accrue economically and when they impact taxable profits.
Under the default rules, capitalized interest is included in ANGIE when it is capitalized but is not included in NGIE/QNGIE until recognized in profit or loss (subject to the ‘relevant asset’ rules). The tax rules for trading stock mean no interest is actually deducted in those early periods, so initially the group shows little or no taxable profit and no tax-interest expense in the computations. In construction years there may be no disallowance if no tax-interest expense is claimed.
De minimis amounts cannot be carried forward, but unused interest allowance (where basic interest allowance exceeds aggregate net tax-interest expense) can be carried forward for up to five years if a full interest restriction return is filed. However – and critically – those early periods also generate no excess capacity carry-forward under CIR. The CIR mechanism doesn’t treat “unclaimed” interest as a free carry-forward; it simply isn’t considered disallowed (because it wasn’t in the tax P&L), so no future relief is preserved. Meanwhile, the group likely has zero or negative tax-EBITDA during development (since there is little revenue), meaning the fixed 30% allowance yields no permitted interest anyway in those years. In sum, early project years pass without using any of the interest capacity (aside from the £2m buffer, if applicable), and any accruing interest effectively “vanishes” from the CIR calculation once the period is over.
The trap is sprung in the completion year. When the development finishes and the property is sold, suddenly a large amount of interest expense that had been capitalized is now deducted in that period’s tax computation (as part of cost of sales). Yet the CIR debt cap and allowance for that final period only recognize the interest accrued in the accounts for that year. All the interest that accrued in earlier years doesn’t appear in the current year’s consolidated P&L (it was recorded in prior periods), so it doesn’t count toward increasing the current year’s CIR limits. The result is a mismatch: the project’s cumulative interest hits the tax P&L in year of sale, but CIR only gives credit for the interest accrued in that year’s accounts. Even if the property sale generates a big profit (boosting tax-EBITDA) in the final year, the 30% fixed ratio allowance and debt cap may still be too low to cover all the brought-forward interest now being deducted. In many cases this leads to a significant portion of the interest expense being permanently disallowed for tax purposes in the final year.
Why “permanently” disallowed? If interest is disallowed under CIR, it can normally be carried forward and potentially deducted in a later period if capacity arises. However, in a single-project development company, the property is now sold – future profits might not materialize to use that disallowed interest. Moreover, since the interest never hit the P&L in the earlier periods, the group didn’t carry forward any unused allowance from those years. The disallowance in the final year is based on a one-year snapshot of interest and EBITDA, with no credit for past “real” interest costs. If this occurs in the company’s last period or before a group change, the chance to ever utilize the disallowed interest is effectively lost. HMRC guidance shows that capitalized interest (included in ANGIE when capitalized ) and the later recognition of that interest in profit or loss can create mismatches that influence the debt cap and may increase restrictions in a later sale period unless elections are considered.
It’s worth noting that even aside from capitalization, property developers in their construction phase often have interest exceeding available profit, making the fixed 30% allowance very low or nil. The £2 million de minimis can provide some relief in early years (e.g. ensuring up to £2m of net interest is always deductible regardless of EBITDA), but for large projects interest will exceed this, and any amount above £2m would be subject to restriction if profits are nil.
In a final period, the de minimis (which applies per period) might not stretch far enough to cover a multi-year heap of interest expense especially if the final period is a short one (since the £2m threshold is time-apportioned for periods shorter than 12 months). This makes timing especially important: a short final period with a large interest deduction is a worst-case scenario because the available allowance (both the fixed 30% and the de minimis) will be proportionately smaller. The key lesson is that timing mismatches under CIR can convert temporary book/tax differences into real, cash-tax costs if not properly planned for.
Example: Capitalized Interest Without vs. With CIR Planning
To illustrate the risk and potential solutions, consider a simplified example of a property development group.
Scenario
ABC Developments Ltd undertakes a two-year project (Years 1 and 2) to construct a commercial property, which it sells in Year 3. The company incurs third-party loan interest of £5 million in Year 1 and £6 million in Year 2. These costs are capitalized into the project’s carrying value. No revenue is earned during Years 1 and 2.
In Year 3, the property is sold, generating taxable trading profits (before interest) of £25 million. The cumulative £11 million of capitalized interest is deducted against that income as part of cost of sales when the project is completed. ABC is part of a larger corporate group, so the £2 million de minimis limit applies at group level, not per company.
CIR Outcome Without Planning
In Years 1 and 2, ABC has no taxable profits and does not claim a tax deduction for the capitalized interest. Accordingly, no CIR disallowance arises in those periods. However, those years also generate no unused interest allowance to carry forward, as there is no aggregate net tax-interest expense or EBITDA.
(The £2 million de minimis cannot be carried forward — it applies only to the current period.)
By Year 3, when the £11 million of interest is recognized in the profit and loss account and deducted for tax purposes, ABC’s fixed-ratio interest allowance is limited to 30% of UK tax-EBITDA, which in this case is £7.5 million (30% × £25 million).
Even if the group makes a group ratio election, the group ratio debt cap may still restrict relief. This is because the debt cap is based on the period’s qualifying net group-interest expense (QNGIE) plus any excess debt cap brought forward. Significant capitalized interest included in ANGIE on capitalization in Years 1–2 but not yet reflected in NGIE/QNGIE can reduce the Year-3 debt-cap figure.
As a result, a material part of the £11 million interest may be disallowed in Year 3. The disallowed amount is carried forward at company level as disallowed tax-interest and may be reactivated in later periods if sufficient interest capacity arises. In ABC’s case, with the project complete and no further income or borrowing, that reactivation is unlikely, leaving a permanent restriction in practice.
The group therefore bears the economic cost of the two years’ financing but fails to obtain full tax relief — an inefficient and easily avoidable outcome.
CIR Outcome With the Interest Allowance (Alternative Calculation) Election
Now assume that, at the start of Year 1, the group makes the Interest Allowance (Alternative Calculation) Election under TIOPA 2010 Sch 7A para 12.
This election changes how capitalized interest is treated for CIR purposes. Instead of being brought into ANGIE at the time of capitalization, it is excluded until it is recognized in profit or loss. When the interest is later taken to the profit and loss account (on sale of the property in Year 3), it is then included in both ANGIE and NGIE (and consequently QNGIE).
Accordingly, in Year 3 the group’s ANGIE, NGIE and QNGIE all include the full £11 million of interest. This alignment increases the debt-cap and group-ratio figures for that year, ensuring that the CIR computation reflects the timing of the actual tax deduction.
If the worldwide group’s external-interest-to-EBITDA ratio supports it, the group ratio method can permit the entire £11 million deduction. The interest allowance therefore matches the economic substance of the project, and no disallowance arises.
HMRC confirms that the election aligns the CIR computation with UK tax principles, removing timing mismatches and preventing unintended restrictions on capitalized interest.
Alternative Accounting Approach: Expensing Interest Annually
Alternatively, if accounting policy permits, ABC could expense interest each year rather than capitalizing it. In that case, the £5 million and £6 million would appear in the profit and loss account in Years 1 and 2. ABC could then use the group’s £2 million de minimis allowance each year and carry forward any disallowed tax-interest.
In Year 3, when the project profit arises, that carried-forward disallowed interest could be reactivated against the new capacity, substantially reducing any overall disallowance.
While this approach may not achieve full relief, it mitigates the restriction compared with doing nothing. However, the optimal outcome remains using the Interest Allowance (Alternative Calculation) Election, which perfectly aligns CIR timing with the project’s tax profile.
Capitalizing interest without making the election can create significant and sometimes irreversible disallowances under the CIR. Making the election ensures that interest is recognized for CIR purposes at the same time as it is deducted for tax, maintaining full deductibility and avoiding timing distortions.
Strategies to Manage CIR Timing Risks for Developer
Interest Allowance (Alternative Calculation) Election
For any property development or construction project where interest is likely to be capitalized, making this election is usually critical. The election is made in the group’s interest restriction return and is irrevocable. It applies to the period of account for which it is made and to subsequent periods. It does not have to be made in the first period that interest is capitalized, but it cannot be backdated.
Once in place, it adjusts the CIR calculations to follow the UK tax treatment of interest. In practice, this means interest on GAAP taxable assets like trading stock is excluded from ANGIE until it hits the P&L, at which point it is included and boosts the interest capacity for that period. By aligning interest recognition for CIR purposes with the actual tax deductions, the election eliminates the timing mismatch and prevents the debt cap from undercutting your interest relief. Our firm has seen time and again that this election can “restore” deductions that would otherwise be lost. A crucial warning: if you forget to make the election at the project’s outset, you cannot fix it later, and the damage (permanent disallowance) may already be done.
Proactive Modeling of Interest and EBITDA: Property developers should model their interest profile against CIR limits from day one. This means forecasting your group’s expected tax-EBITDA and interest over the project timeline and seeing how much interest would be deductible each period under both the 30% fixed ratio and a potential group ratio. If the model shows that interest will exceed capacity (especially in the final period), take action early.
- Decide on Expensing vs Capitalization: If accounting standards give a choice (e.g. for internally financed interest or where borrowing costs could be expensed), consider whether claiming interest yearly yields a better CIR outcome. Expensing can secure immediate use of the £2m annual allowance and create interest allowance carry-forwards for later use. Capitalizing interest, on the other hand, with the Alternative Calculation Election can produce a better result for the group ratio (since interest will align with the profit) and may maximize deduction over the project life. Each approach has pros and cons – there is no single “right answer” universally – so modeling helps determine which is optimal for your situation.
- Estimate Potential Disallowances: If a significant interest disallowance appears likely even after elections, plan for how it will be handled. Will the disallowed interest be carried forward to offset future profits (and are such profits expected)? If the project company might be sold or wound up, a large carry forward disallowance would be wasted – so this may influence financing decisions.
Use the Group Ratio Method if Advantageous
The standard 30% of EBITDA cap can be restrictive for highly leveraged businesses. If your worldwide group’s external interest is high relative to its EBITDA, a Group Ratio Election can increase the UK interest capacity. For example, if the global consolidated interest is 50% of global EBITDA, the group ratio method could allow deductions up to 50% of UK EBITDA (subject to debt cap). Real estate groups often have substantial external debt, so this election is frequently beneficial.
In our example, using the group ratio was what enabled the full £11m deduction when the alternative calculation election was in place (since the group’s leverage was ~44% of EBITDA, higher than the fixed 30%). Note that the group ratio election is made annually through the CIR return and can be changed year-to-year. It should be evaluated as part of year-end tax planning– especially if the group’s leverage profile changes or one-off transactions occur.
Other CIR Elections and Considerations: The CIR legislation contains numerous elections (around 14 in total). Besides the two mentioned above, property groups should be aware of:
- The Group Ratio (Blended) Election for joint ventures – if your development is in a JV with another investor, this election can allow a “blended” group ratio reflecting both owners, potentially increasing interest capacity in the JV. Joint ventures are common in large projects, and mismatches in leverage between partners can otherwise lead to disproportionate restrictions.
- The Interest Allowance (Non-Consolidated Investment) Election – this allows a group with a minority investment (e.g. a 40% share in a JV company) to include a proportionate share of that investee’s EBITDA and interest in its own calculations. This can help when a property developer holds a stake in a separate venture that is highly leveraged.
- The Public Infrastructure Election, etc., which likely won’t apply to most private developers, but can exempt qualifying projects from CIR limits if they meet strict criteria (e.g. certain long-term public infrastructure assets).
Each election has specific conditions, and some are irrevocable or require joint action with other parties. Professional advice is recommended to navigate these options. The common theme is that the Corporate Interest Restriction regime is not one-size-fits-all – it offers flexibility to adjust the rules to better fit commercial reality, but only if taxpayers proactively elect and comply with the requirements.
Financing Structure and Timing Planning: Beyond CIR-specific choices, consider your overall financing plan. If modeling shows an interest restriction that cannot be fully mitigated, you might reduce debt or capitalize the company with more equity to avoid excessive interest in the first place.
Alternatively, if a restriction is unavoidable, ensure the business plan accounts for the cash tax impact e.g. budget for the tax on disallowed interest and, if possible, time asset sales or group reorganizations to maximize the use of any carry-forwards. For instance, if a big disallowance is expected on completion of a project, it might be worth retaining that company for future projects or rental activities, so that future profits can utilize the disallowed interest (rather than selling the company or liquidating it immediately). Timing of intercompany interest payments can also be managed: interest that might be “late-paid” (over 12 months overdue) risks being deferred for tax in any case, which in turn interacts with CIR. All these moving parts underscore the importance of integrated planning – looking at accounting, tax, and financing together.
Conclusion
CIR can pose a significant tax risk for property developers, particularly through the subtle timing issues introduced by capitalized interest during development phases. What might seem like a mere accounting treatment choice can have real tax consequences – potentially turning otherwise deductible financing costs into non-deductible amounts. The good news is that with informed planning, these outcomes can be avoided. Measures like the Interest Allowance (Alternative Calculation) Election are specifically designed to address such timing distortions. Coupled with strategic use of other elections (e.g. group ratio methods) and careful forecasting, a developer can navigate the CIR regime and preserve full interest deductibility across a project’s life.
Sterling & Wells
We are Sterling & Wells — a UK-based team of accountants and tax advisors helping individuals and businesses stay fully HMRC compliant. From VAT and bookkeeping to self-assessments and tax planning, we’ve got your finances covered.